Skip to main content

About your Search

20120501
20120531
STATION
CSPAN2 43
CNNW 36
CNN 35
WHUT (Howard University Television) 31
CSPAN 29
CNBC 22
CSPAN3 21
WETA 19
FOXNEWS 17
KQED (PBS) 16
KRCB (PBS) 10
SFGTV2 8
WMPT (PBS) 7
MSNBC 6
MSNBCW 6
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 351
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 351 (some duplicates have been removed)
of international waters. 162 countries and the european community have ratified the treaty but the united states is not to read to the secretary of state hillary clinton and defense secretary leon panetta urged the senate to approve the treaty setting national security, job creation and oil exploration. they testified at the senate foreign relations committee. it's just under three hours. >> the hearing will come to order. thank you all very much for being with us today. secretary clinton, secretary panetta and general dempsey, welcome, we are privileged to have you here today. we thank you for joining us. it's a rare occasion in any committee but in this committee when we have simultaneously a panel of witnesses that brings together americans top diplomat, our country's top descends official and our nation's top military officer. your presence here altogether powerfully underscores the importance that you put on this issue. our committee shares the sense of importance which is why i hope without respect to party or ideology we begin an open, honest and comprehensive discussion about whether the
. historically each time that the united states has entered into almost any kind of treaty we have been very acidious in doing everything we could to follow that treaty. we have not always been afforded the reciprocal courtesy. i suggest that a new start is a good example of what happens when we don't negotiate in a way that is only in the best interest of the united states. we in the first phase of new start reduced our strategic war head counts significantly without really impacting the russians a great deal when the tactical war heads were left completely out of the equation and part of that promise was that we would modernize our nuclear weapons capability. and it just seems like over time things degrade. and to give a president as flexible as this one the ability to enter into treaties without congressional approval on something as critical as our space assets and our space access is, i think, a foolish ernd on our part and i hope we suggest that. >> gentleman from california, five minutes. >> some time ago mr. andrews suggested that we try to avoid presidential politics as we continue
the united states and europe remain each other's best parkhurst and that when the american president or european leader looks how the public and says pudu one call when there's a problem of the person on the other side of the cleantech. my judgment is that is not going to change anytime soon partly because of the affinity of interest of the values and also there aren't other options and even though there are emerging countries out your waist count on our european allies and to rely on our european allies more than we can count on a cost-cutting. at the same time i think it's clear that we are at the cusp of a major historic transition in the global landscape in which the world that nato represents his losing the primacy it enjoyed the last 200 years and if you look at the share of global product represented by nato and i would include japan because they are a part of the western world since world war ii we've gone from roughly 70% of the global product to 50% and we are headed towards 40% and that says to me the big security question of the day are about how we are going to manage th
of real significance to the united states. to do that, we will dedicate 80% of our effort to four major cases. right now they are syria, kenya, north/central america and burma. then we'll have another eight to ten places where we can test new approaches or make a welcome difference by just sending the the right person at the right time. so far i think we're gaining traction in each of our major priority engagements. many of you are working in these places, and we realize that we won't know it all or know best about them, so we hope for your support. in syria we are providing a nontraditional surge to empower and unite a fractured, nonviolent opposition. as the secretary announced, that includes providing nonlethal assistance. we are also working with partners to set up an outpost for the internal opposition to coordinate and communicate with the international community. in kenya we are helping to develop plans to insure peaceful and credible elections a year before the vote. incidentally, kenya is one place where we've seen a potential model for broad cooperation and innovation. in nort
. as the president said, preventing a nuclear iran is in the interest of the united states. we have issued reports, and the most recent one was issued on and.ary 1 and it includes a distinguished panel of four democratic members of congress, admirals' and generals and also experts to area our last report supported the view that the best approached to this challenge is a simultaneous pursuit of a triple track policy, which is of diplomacy, tough sanctions, and a credible and invisible military threat. we also issued a white paper on each of those tracks. i want to highlight one recommendation on each of those tracks, and then i will change it over to mort zuckerman. and the military threat we believe the united states should boost the credibility of its military to air around us nuclear facilities, and we have spelled out how to do so. one element has been selling bunker busters' to israel. we do not advocate an israeli strike, but this will send a strong signal to tehran to negotiate in good faith, encourage other states that the alternative to supporting u.s. sanctions could be military conflict
in history the united states needs latin america more than latin america needs the united states? now, cast your mind back a decade ago or little over a decade ago. that question would have seemed absurd. the united states was the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, the most powerful country economically, politically, militarily. why on earth would it need anyone, let alone a continent known for its economic crises, its political instability, for having almost no global clout? well, how times have changed. and how used we we have become o the fact of change. there's an old jewish joke that i heard probably about 5,000 times when i was growing up, and it's set in eastern europe in the 19th century in a period when borders were changing very rapidly. and the story goes that a woman is pegging up washing, and a kazakh soldier rides up and declares, old woman, from this day forth, this land is no longer poland, it is imperial russia. and then he rides off. and she watches him go, and she says, thank god, i couldn't stand another polish winter. [laughter] thank you for laughing. i'll p
disruptive not only in a conflict can be destructive to the united states but other countries as well and that is one of the things about military operations in cyberspace with cascading effect that are hard to predict. we have concerns about this and this is why we created joint military platforms like a strategic security dialogue to talk about issues that we feel our potential for friction in the u.s./china relationship. cyber is one of those areas. we don't talk about space, nuclear and missile defense areas as part of the strategic dialogue. >> you mentioned last year spending was almost double what the public acknowledgment was. what things will you give us as examples that they are spending on this year? you did not speculate on the number but what they are spending on this year but not publicly acknowledged? >> we think their nuclear force modernization occurs and research and development money that goes through their defense industry we also think is from a different budget, a different account. some foreign acquisitions come from a different account as well and some local co
billion that would be royalties that would be paid to the isa as "pos opposed to the united states and of course go to the organization in kingston, jamaica for redistribution to the developing world. and this is the first time in history that an international organization, the u.n. in this case, would possess taxing authority over this country. now, i've heard the veto argument. discussed by one of the other members here. i think the secretary ritsch. it's really not too important to discuss that, because there are two entities that would make that determination. you have the council, the 36th-member council, the assembly, to make these decisions, but the point is, under article 160, it's going to cost us. well, let's see. yeah. under article 82, payments and contributions shall be made annually rp to all production at a site after this period's time. what we're saying, it's going to be paid regardless of where you think it should go or where you think it is going to go. the second thing i want to kov herb is the environmental and, we in this, for the ten years now have rejected i
the united states, have observed for centuries. given that we haven't, to date, had any major disruptions at sea, can you respond to that and talk about why it's -- why the sense now is that it's imperative to ratify the treaty? >> i can. the customary international law evolves and i can give you an example of something on the land domain in a moment. but it evolves. and it is subject to individual interpretations. so, threading this back to my earlier answer. the rise of new nations competing for resources, brazil, russia, india, china, the list goes on and on. their rise puts us in a position where unless we have this convention with which to form a basis to have the conversation about resources of the sort you're talking about, does cause us to be increasingly at risk to instability. and that's my job, instability. the secretary can speak eloquently about the economic h i issues, but i'm speaking to the security issues. so that is what has changed. and i'll give you the example of the land domain that i mentioned. we are party to the geneva convention. there were plenty of customary i
that would bind the united states. and by doing so in a way that is never submitted for congressional specifically senate approval that just keeps congress out of the loop and unable to have its proper role in these issues. and why it's so important, mr. chairman, is because there are significant policy and operational concerns with the e.u. code of conduct or something that resembles it with regard to our security. for instance an unclassified excerpt from the executive summary of the joint staff operations assessment of the draft e.u. code said if the united states were to make a good faith effort at implementing the requirements of the draft code there could be operations impacts on u.s. military space operations in several areas, up quote. and i have no doubt, mr. chairman, that attempting to comply with something like the e.u. code of conduct would impact our space operations. we would be doing things or not doing things that would otherwise not happen. becoming a signatory on this type of code of conduct without congressional approval appears intended to implement international
of access to new drugs, not only in the united states, but throughout the world. others have referred to a number of basic facts, that the united states, for example, has 1.2 million persons living on hiv. and with new infections, that number is growing every year. i can remember when the size of the community was considered 200,000 people and now it's 1.2 million people. and five years from now, it will be more than 1.2 million people. you mentioned the cost of a triplet being $25,000 a year. that's a fairly inexpensive calculative in the current environment in the united states. some of the more expensive regimes, even for treatment of these patients could be as much as $35,000 and for people that have developed drug resistance, which a lot of patients that will happen to them over their period of treatment is a lifelong treatment occur at present. the treatments could be $50,000 to $75,000 per year. i don't see how you take a country with 1.2 million people that have that condition and impose those kinds of astronomical costs. the cdc currently says 64% of the people living in the
to advance of the work of the -- initiative that benefits the united states national security. at the end of my term, i will look forward to new opportunities to serve indiana had to serve our nation. i will embrace projects where i can deliver the most benefits. i will continue to support the program in any way that i can. i also want to build on my work related to nutrition and energy issues, both locally and globally. i've no regrets about running for reelection. all of us should believe in the inability of standing before the public and asking -- of the nobility of standing before the public and asking for their votes. i still counsel young citizens to consider elective public office and i hope some listening to me tonight will do just that. serving the people of indiana in the united states and it has been the greatest honor of my public life. hoosier's deserve the best representation possible. they deserve legislators who will listen to their entire spectrum of citizen views and work to achieve consensus. they deserve legislators to go to work speaking about how they can solve probl
states. hispanic children are at the highest level of poverty in the history of the united states. i think the challenge is not how to bring them over to immigration reform or dialogue. just to make sure the latino community knows these facts and understands the failure of president obama. >> i agree with you there is a lot of ammunition. these comments about self deportation have indicated to some in the community he does not have respect for them. go to south texas and talk to latino ranch and farm owners and small businesses and members of the hispanic community. they are hard asses because they are the first to feel the adverse affect. cartels are shooting at them. are competing for jobs. there are a lot of reasons why they are hard asses but they do want to know the presidential candidate has respect for the community and in recognition this is not all a mexican problem. half the people here illegally came from hong kong the, nigeria on a visa and overstating it. the fact that all the people from central america are unworthy is a real problem. >> thank you. >> we will get behind
's now waiting at a beijing hospital for a possible move to the united states. the deal was reached after days of tense negotiations between the u.s. and chinese officials. today, we look at how the two major powers negotiated a diplomatic mine field. >> reporter: a blind man escapes house arrest in shandong province and the crisis meetings begin. civil rights activist chen guangcheng slipped past his guards on april 22nd. four days later, he sought sanctuary at the u.s. embassy in beijing. chen had campaigned against forced abortions under china's one child policy. he complained of illegal detention, beatings and persecution of his family. his internet protest couldn't have come at a worse time for chinese authorities. just days before, they had talks with washington. but u.s. officials were equally keen to avoid a diplomatic confrontation. they need cooperation from china on hostile economic and strategic issues, not least in tackling nuclear programs of north korea and iran. on may 2nd, u.s. officials announced they had worked out a deal with the chinese government. chen was transferre
distrust and resentment of the united states can be traced to the mexican war. the mexican war also hastened the civil war. it might not have been fought if the mexican war had not opened the volatile slavery debate. now, the mexican war's often confused with the texan war for independence from mexico ten years earlier in 1836. the texas revolution is known for the battles of the alamo and san ha sin toe -- ha seen toe and the exploits of sam houston and davy crockett. the mexican war is known as polk's war. the 11th president, james k. polk, supervised it from its beginning in may 1846 to the treaty signing 21 months later. the peace treaty transferred 530,000 square miles from mexico to the united states, incredible territory. from mexico we obtained the future states of california, new mexico, arizona, nevada, utah and parts of colorado and wyoming. literally 42% of mexico's territory at that time. the major battles were fought at palo alto, monterey and buena vista, the gates of mexico city. always outnumbered, the americans won every major battle. sometimes, as in buena vista,
in afghanistan, the united states really pulled back. we won the cold war, we won the covert action issue with respect to afghanistan, and as you all have very well pointed out, there were other fish to fry, germany, gorbachev taking a lot of time and effort on the part of the administration. i guess my question is was there any consideration given during that time, to your knowledge, of trying to stay in there in that region, trying to keep an eye on what osama might become, trying to deal with the disease that began with the iranian revolution of going back to a more fundamentalist, islamic approach. i tend to credit the stories that say the administration was busy on another front, but it's worth looking at, because the taliban that had its roots there is still with us. >> i didn't wrk after -- work afghan issues in 1989. maybe you will remember this. hi to look back a bit. as a historian, the interesting thing, you have to remember before the soviet invasion of afghanistan, it is not like afghanistan had been an important place to the united states. in other words, the united states c
the number one strategic threat to the united states. that sounds very yesteryear i must say. we will have other panels talk about russia but i don't think anyone will buy on to that proposition and as for china, we all know that china is an easy target in some ways, but we have already mentioned people -- the wise heads of the republican party. i can assure you just read henry kissinger's latest book on china and candidate mitt romney will get a lot of advice between now and when it gets anywhere near the convention not to mention the white house to go easy on china. one reason i am puzzled by it is that will not win an election. it is the economy. >> you want to pick up on this? >> there are a lot of things about the nature of the challenge that we face. i start with the point that the economy is more dependent on the global economy than in the past and the collective action challenge homi talked about is real. i differ when i look at successful administrations. the republicans run as if american power unfettered from multilateral institutions is the way to run the world. they enter offi
to blow up a passenger jet bound for the united states. a u.s. counter terrorism official tells cnn the explosive device is similar to the one used by the would-be underwear bomber. just like that bomb, there one did not contain metal, which raises real questions about whether it could have gotten passed airport security. as of yet, the person who had developed that bomb had not yet bought a ticket. here's defense secretary, leon panetta. >> what this incident makes clear is that this country has to continue to remain vigilant against those that would seek to attack this country and we will do everything necessary to keep america safe. >> fran townsend is cnn's national security contributor, a member of both the dhs and cia external advisory boards. chad sweet is a former dhs and cia official, also the cofounder of the chertoff group, a global security firm. good to see both of you. fran, i know you've been reporting on this throughout the day. we're hearing now that there could have been this bomb and other bombs, perhaps. how close of a call was this? >> you know, the official i s
, and he said that the united states wanted to be a tremendous partner and cheerleader of the development of brazil's offshore industry. now, mr. president, i have to tell you that was like rubbing salt in the wound of tens of thousands of oil field workers and others who are suffering because of the obama administration policy here in this country really discouraging energy development. the way president obama proposed to be a strong supporter and partner and cheerleader of brazilian offshore development was through an ex-im bank loan and there are many of these sorts of loans. again, in august, 2009, talking about brazil, the case i mentioned, "the wall street journal" reported an editorial that -- quote -- "the u.s. is going to lend billions of dollars to brazil's state-owned oil company, petrobrass to finance exploration of the huge offshore delivery in brazil's oil field near rio de janeiro" -- close quote. again the ex-im bank provided a $2 billion loan to aid brazilian oil production and that's what president obama was cheering and encouraging and making happen. it's happened other
combat troops go home. >> today i signed a historic agreement between the united states and afghanistan that defines a new kind of relationship between our countries. a future in which afghans are responsible for the security of their nation, and we build an equal partnership between two sovereign states. >> obama and afghan president karzai signed a strategic partnership agreement. it cements of u.s. commitment to afghanistan after american combat troops leave in 2014. it will be effective until 2024. the deal allows u.s. forces to train afghan soldiers and engage in sweep operations against al qaeda. >> our goal is to destroy al qaeda, and we are on a path to do exactly that. >> this was obama's first visit to afghanistan since december 2010, and a third since he took office. it coincided with the one-year anniversary of the death of al qaeda leader osama bin laden. >>> the u.n. security council is considering black listing about 40 more north korean companies. the new sanctions would be in response to pyongyang's failed launch of what it called a sat lie-carrying rocket. the council
between pakistan and the united states. the foreign minister spoke about the sore spot in an exclusive interview with nhk. she says she supports a court decision to imprison a pakistani doctor who helped american intelligence authorities track down al qaeda leader osama bin laden. >> you have to respect the law of every country. and you have to respect our other's laws and respect our expectations of each other and our realistic expectations and i think the realistic expectations of any one country to go against the laws is not a realistic or healthy expectation. >> pakistani courts sentenced shakil afridi wednesday to 33 years in prison for treason. u.s. secretary of state hillary clinton denounced the ruling as unjust. she says the obama administration will continue to pursue the issue with pakistani authorities. u.s./pakistan relations worsened after american special forces raided a compound near islamabad last may and killed bin laden. they took another hit after u.s. helicopters killed 24 pakistani soldiers last november. pakistan's government retaliated by closing supply routes f
the united states which are suffering a huge crisis in funding and sustainability for aids treatment outside the united states, it would take this market. if it would work here, it would create enormous pressure to rethink the rest of the problem for cancer drugs, diabetes and other areas. >> not so loud, somebody may hear you. and so the challenge is the government. if you have a system that doesn't work and it's about innovation, can you innovate and can you do something different? thank you very much. >> thank you very much. let me start off and let's do this informally. let me start off with an ethical question. and i noticed, doctor, you deal with ethics. i think the average american would be extremely upset to know that people are dying not because we don't know how to treat those people -- that's one sad aspect of life -- but that they can't afford what is, in fact, a minimal cost in terms of the real production of the product to save their lives. riots like somebody over there dying and nobody is going out and reaching them a hand and bringing their in. what are the ethical implicati
term energy technology future than the united states. the only question is whether these resources can be coordinated to maximum advantage and that is where public policy inevitably must enter the picture. thank you very much for your time. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. mr. jenkins? >> thank you, chairman bingaman, ranking member murkowski and distinguished members of the committee. i direct the energy and climate program at the breakthrough institute, an independent public policy think tank based in oakland, california. it's an honor to appear before you today to discuss the role of government and energy innovation, particularly on my birthday and senator murkowski's. advanced energy policy and markets in the united states are now at a key inflection point. in recent years, u.s. advanced energy sectors have grown rapidly, adding jobs even through the depth of the recession, while reducing costs for many technologies, including solar and wind power, batteries for electric vehicles and advanced biofuels. still, a recent cost declines mark important industry m
that refused to fight in the united states for example eugene debs rose to give a tour against american participation in the war and was sent to prison and was still in prison in november 1920 when he received nearly a million votes for president on the socialist ticket. another america the pioneer social worker jane addams also was a strong opponent of the war for more than 500 americans were jailed as conscientious objectors including these two at fort riley arkansas. in germany the great radical spoke out against the war and britain the meeting philosopher was most elegant of the war a hero for me writing this book. i will review one thing if you want describing the feeling he rode and i appreciate him because of this intellectual bravery and acknowledging the conflict in his feelings which is something that often most of us don't do when we take a political stand. they describe themselves as being tortured by patriotism as ardently as any retired colonel. love of them was the strongest the motion i possessed and in a period setting aside such a moment making it difficult as truth, t
enlightened than that of the united states of america. matched only perhaps by the -- by the admission, policy of governor schwarzenegger in california. who knows who his secretary of state might be. there are a lot of names floating out there. bob zellic, president of the world bank. was one. he believes that -- in dealing with china and other countries that, what's we should ask of countries is to be responsible stake holders in a rule based international economy. that's pretty close to the theme of bruce's paper. here is the one exception which i think will, is both curious in terms of its motivation and -- and affect -- and will probably fade. and that is, a lot of -- sort of cheap, bashing of other countries. john michael and i make the point in our paper that every country on the planet with two exceptions has to hope and pray is never mentioned during american presidential campaign. because if it is mentioned it is going to be bad. two exceptions are israel and great britain. and, of course, china has come up a lot. russia has come up a lot. for some reason has declared that russia is t
unedifying. and here we are, the united states of america, the inventor of modern democracy, and i suspect that many of you around the room, i know quite a few of you travel a great deal and you must hear the same things that the four of us do when we travel. what is going on in your country and when are you going to get this thing over with and get back to leading the world? the second consequence is that it has a extremely negative effect on the ability of the united states' government and the president himself to actually conduct foreign policy. because a lot of foreign policy requires, of course, the cooperation of the legislative branch. it is -- it is not just difficult, it's impossible to imagine getting any major treaty through. i mean, maybe there is some chance of the law of the sea getting through -- bruce would have a better sense of that than i. i know there are some optimistic signs. if you look at what this means for the two most important threats facing the planet today, which is our nuclear proliferation and climate change, we're dead in the water. and we're dead in the wa
's a friend and ally of the united states. we are not calling for australian membership. we are calling for a partnership to develop. australia trains more energetically with germany and britain and france. you already trained significantly with the united states. let's say there is another humanitarian disaster the way there was in december of 2004 what happened on december 26th, australia, united states and japan and india deployed together to help the people of sri lanka and southern india because we had trained together in the air and sea. we want that type of cooperation. you have been a stalwart ally in afghanistan but you had to do it on the run not having worked very much with the european allies. it is inculcating patterns of cooperation and military training and confers no obligation on the part of parter countries. in essence it is the best of both worlds for the asia-pacific allies from my perspective. >> also hearing the most frequent complaint from australian officials is you are more than happy to use soldiers and resources in battle but we are not involved in the plannin
: the clerk will report. the clerk: pule j.watford of california to be united states judge for the ninth circuit. mr. reid: madam president, i ask -- let's see. i have a cloture motion. i want that reported, please. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. clerithe clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on nomination of paul j. wattford of california to be the united states circuit judge for the ninth circuit signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. reid: madam president, i would ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum under rule 22 be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i now ask, madam president, the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate resumes legislative session. mr. reid: and what is the pending business? the presiding officer: the motion to proceed to s
the best math scores. ...the united states would be on that list. in 25th place. let's raise academic standards across the nation. let's get back to the head of the class. let's solve this. >>> jack cafferty is here with "the cafferty file." jack? >> wolf, president obama's support for same-sex marriage is sure to fire up parts of the liberal base it could alienate other parts including black voters. in other words, backing gay marriage might be a risky proposition for the president in an election year when it comes to one of the core voting blocs. in 2008, you'll recall african-americans were crucial in making this president the first black president. 96% of black voters supported obama and they made up 13% of the electorate. fast forward four years approximately while polls suggest america on the whole is moving toward supporting same-sex marriage. nbc-washington post voting say 56 are opposed to it and this opposition from blacks could hurt the president especially in the south. just this week, north killer carol blacks voted two to one in favor of an amendment in that state bannin
for the economy of the united states. i have been a supporter of the export-import bank since i arrived in congress in 1977. simply put, the ex-im bank supports the sales of american-made products overseas when private finances is not available. -- financing is not available. according to the ex-im bank's 2011 annual report, the bank supported $32.7 billion in exports last year, over 288,000 american jobs. many of these jobs are in the pacific northwest and in my congressional district. i ask unanimous consent to put -- and add additional information. the important point srk let's vote for this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the distinguish mad jort leader, the gentleman from virginia, mr. cantor. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. cantor: i thank the speaker and i thank the gentleman from california. mr. speaker, i rise today to speak in favor of h.r. 2072, securing american jobs through export act of 2011. make no mistake, i am no fan of government sub
legalizing drugs would have a very positive effect on the murder rate in the united states. guest: i believe that. if we look at border violence with mexico, 40,000 deaths south of the border over the last four years. this is a prohibition phenomenon. these are disputes being played out with guns rather than the courts. legalized marijuana, arguably 75% of the border violence goes away as a result of legalizing marijuana. that being the estimate of the drug cartel's activities involved in the marijuana trade. host: the next call comes from michigan, outside detroit. jamie, you are on. caller: i was calling because i have a problem with the child protective services right now. i am wondering why in michigan the target of lower income families. they are targeting the lower income families and there is not any fairness in the court system. guest: i do not have the answer in this particular -- if the state is utilizing discretion in how the funds are being distributed. i get back to the model i think we're going to have to have to fix medicaid and medicare. virtually all existing federal program
the challenges with less risk of damage to the economies of the rest of the world and the united states. >> if breeze is forced out of the euro before they get to this wonderful package of slower austerity and more growth? is forced out of the euro? >> europe as a whole has a very strong incentive in doing what it's gone to take to make monetary union work. that's what the reforms over the last six months have tried to do. they tried to put in place a set of mechanisms for discipline in fiscal policy and cooperating on fiscal policy, for sharing as of resources, for managing the financial system that need to make monetary union work. i think their decisions, confronted with this fear of broad erosion in your experiment, is to redouble their commitment to try to make this thing work. if we believe they have the ability to do that. we hope they manage this process. very difficult set of intelligence. >> to learn anything from their experience or is it totally different? >> the talent is are different, but if you listen to where we started this conversation, what we're trying to do is make
's a very good example of where germany could lead in the future and help the united states and the united kingdom to rebuild our badly weak bridges to the russian leadership as president putin takes power and we must do this because russia's just too important and russia is both in some ways an adversary, not in military terms, but politically, but in some ways it's a friend and partner of the united states. we want to accentuate the friendship and partnership. i think chanceler merkel is perfectly placed to be that bridge for the u.s. to russia. >> terry murphy. good day, sir. quick comment and a two-part question. comment number one is you kind of overlooked the trans-atlantic business dialogue which has been going on for 20 years quite prominently. but secondly on the question of germany, last week i think it was captain harry whales, junior officer of the british army, got an award from the beneficiary council for his efforts to support the wounded warriors of britain and we know that the wounded warriors here are supported by the populous. there was a piece in the paper that wounded
for managing this transition i think it will withstand the test of time. at the united states in europe go their separate ways and figuring out how to preserve a rules-based system, then i hear that the next 20 or 30 years will be a very substantive period and international history. .. >> we are chasing to get out. we collectively, the reliance as you were just saying, senator, and i think it will be a long time coming before nato engages in the same kind of operation if engaged in in afghanistan. libya, i think the success more conclusive, but many of the conditions that were present in libya are not being replicated elsewhere, particularly in syria. a u.n. legal authority, the approval of the arab world, the degree to which libya was close to reservoirs of european power and, therefore, easy to the europeans did you even though they still relied heavily on us. in that regard i think some of the most important nato programs moving forward will not be the deployment of force, even though surely there will be some of that. they will be the broad array of programs, the partnerships, the medi
in the southwest united states, where cities that were, if you take certain cities on the edge of california, on their edge of los angeles, for example, that were -- had a conventional post war democratic and have now become 90 to 95% hispanic, this is a democratic that wasn't even in the 1960 u.s. census. that's actually a big transformation in a fairly short space of time. and it has consequences. now, when you put the why, i would do you care, that's the benign view. people think -- we were talking about broadway just we went on air. that's like the production of holiday pel low doll -- "hello dolly" and then he ran out of brassy, middle-aged blonds, and then he changed it to an all-black cast, and people think that's what happened if you have a muslim netherlands or muslim britain, there will be fewer pubs, the pubs will have to close, but essentially it will basically still be the same, and i don't think that's -- no serious person would argue that. >> host: on the cover of the new paperback version of "america alone" there's a little sticker, soon to be banned in canada. >> guest: that
as an officer in the united states air force. after 26 years at the c.i.a. and national security council, he became president of texas and, a, many university. in 2006, president george w. bush appointed him sex tear of defense succeeding donald rumsfeld. under his watch, gates oversaw iraq's troop surge. president-elect obama asked him to stay in the job. he became the first defense secretary to serve both a republican and democratic president. in the obama administration he played a pivotal role in shaping u.s. policy in afghanistan. he was a key player in the decision to send additional forces into the country. he was at the center of the debate on the raid to kill osama bin laden last may. gates stepped down as defense secretary in june, 2011. here is what president obama said at gates' farewell ceremony. >> what you see is a man that i've come to know and respect. a humble american patriot. a man of common sense and decency. quite simply one of our nation's finest public servants. >> reporter: i talked with bob gates in williamsburg virginia at the college of william & mary where he acc
, will be revitalized and refocused on article v. the united states has f-16 training programs in poland and will retain a base in romania so there is just a few examples of the steps that we have taken as a nation as an alliance to reassure our eastern allies. there is more that can be done but i think those important first step so i've laid out these four problems in my argument is that at the summit and within nato, we are taking steps to deal with all of those problems. doesn't it doesn't mean they go away. but steps are taken to deal with them. >> thank you, madam. >> thank you all very much. i want to start dr. binnendijk with your comments amount missile defense and as mr. brzezinski mentioned earlier, this month we heard russia suggest that they might use preemptive force against missile installations if there is not a topic of agreement reached with nato. do you think this is just posturing? do you think there are -- this represents a heightened -- a heightened threat on the part of russia to oppose the missile defense installation or should we just expect more rhetoric and continue as you sugg
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 351 (some duplicates have been removed)